Minnesota Sands has offered to voluntarily conduct an Environmental Impact Statement[EIS]--an in-depth study that examines a project's potential affects on environmental and quality of life issues--for the proposed Dabelstein and Yoder frac sand mines in Saratoga Township. Earlier this month, the Minnesota Department of Health and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency recommended an EIS for the proposed sites.

Tonight's scheduled public hearing at Southeast Tech's Tandeski Center has been cancelled as a result.

A frac sand mining company proposing two mines in Winona County has
agreed to conduct an in-depth environmental review of the projects
voluntarily, officials said Thursday.

The decision by Minnesota Sands
comes two weeks after the Minnesota Department of Health and Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency called for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the proposals.

The more detailed review isn't
required by state law, so it had been up to Winona County officials to
decide whether to require one. A hearing on that question had been
scheduled for tonight, but county officials cancelled the meeting after
being notified of Minnesota Sands' decision. . . .

Well, doesn't that sound wonderful? That the company has volunteered to conduct a more exhaustive environmental review of itself? See, what good actors and neighbors the industrial sand mining industry is?

Winona County Planner Jason Gilman said the scope of the EIS, and
which governmental unit will do it, will be determined in a few days.
It's possible it will be Winona County but if the scope goes into
quarries that might be opened in Fillmore County, the state might get
involved, he said.

It's also possible that a processing plant could be studied as part of of the study, he said.

This is the first EIS for silica mining in
southeastern Minnesota, he said, and could set the tone and direction
for other operations. "I think this is certainly precedent-setting,"
Gilman said.

Earlier in the PB article, however, the spokester for Minnesota Sands continued the public relations offense, painting the EIS as simply a process that would make critics feel better:

"I think this EIS will remove all those concerns," he said. "They
don't know what is in the hearts and minds of the people who are trying
to get this done … this will bring everybody up to the same speed and
should answer all of their concerns."

When the smaller environmental assessment worksheet,
which can be a precursor to an EIS, was done, nearly all public comments
were negative. Opponents cited noise, the number of trucks, water
pollution and fear of silicosis as reasons they wanted at least a full
EIS. Also, the Minnesota Health Department and Pollution Control Agency
have asked for the EIS because of many of the same concerns. . . .

The full environmental study will help appease those who oppose mines, Bublitz said. "Why not just do it?" he asked.

The landowners who want to lease their land to
Minnesota Sands "are good, decent people," he said. "They respect the
land … this is their backyard."

The paper interviewed an organizer for Land Stewardship Project who maintained a more clear eyed perspective:

Johanna Rupprecht, Land Stewardship Project policy organizer, said
that while Minnesota Sands asked for the EIS voluntarily, "it's clear
that because of the public pressure" the study couldn't be avoided.

She wants to make sure it is done right. "We are gong to be very vigilant and make sure it gets done right," she said.

Land Stewardship Project, which maintains a field office in Lewiston, issued a statement:

It was announced today that
an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be performed on the
controversial Dabelstein-Yoder frac sand mines proposed for Winona
County's Saratoga Township. While an EIS is in process, all permitting
decisions are put on hold.

Today's announcement that Minnesota
Sands, the proposer of the Dabelstein-Yoder frac sand mine facilities,
has formally "requested" that an EIS be performed on its projects
verifies what has been clear from the beginning: an EIS for a project of
this scope was necessary. This fact was reinforced most recently when
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the Minnesota Department of
Health called for a full EIS of these proposed frac sand mines.

The
Land Stewardship Project is concerned that the proposers of the mines
do not understand the EIS process and their role in this process. The
latest evidence of this is a letter dated Feb. 20 to Jason Gilman,
Winona County's Planning Director. In the letter, the proposers asked
that the permitting process be tabled to "allow us to perform a
voluntary EIS." Under Minnesota law, the EIS must be performed by the
county, not the proposers. This is critical to make certain that the
study is done in a way that all potential impacts to our land, water,
air, roads and community are examined thoroughly and fairly.

It
has become clear in recent weeks that in fact these projects are not
appropriate for the community, given the strain they would put on the
environment, human health and the infrastructure. Given the proposers'
unwillingness to engage in a thorough environmental review up to this
point, the Land Stewardship Project will be watching the EIS process
very closely.

Here's the letter from G-Cubed consulting announcing that the company's decision: